Impressive. Even by today's GOP standards. You may have heard how he is Jew-ish and not Jewish as he claimed, but the list is so much longer than that:

https://newrepublic.com/post/169751/eve ... ied-so-far

Thank you so much for this. I was going to start a thread on him.

Here is another one: he claims he had a brain tumor.

https://gothamist.com/news/george-santo ... rain-tumor

C’mon on now - give the guy some space, his grandfather Pelé just died

His Mom died in 9/11 … well, from a 9/11 related illness.. a few years later… in 2016

skyservice_330 wrote:

His Mom died in 9/11 … well, from a 9/11 related illness.. a few years later… in 2016

He is mourning his mother who recently died a third time

As astounding as his lies are, they aren't what concerns me. Where did he get the money to loan his campaign $750,000? Somebody bought and paid for him and I want to know who it is. For a newcomer with no influence to get that amount of money is "curious"...

johns624 wrote:

As astounding as his lies are, they aren't what concerns me. Where did he get the money to loan his campaign $750,000? Somebody bought and paid for him and I want to know who it is. For a newcomer with no influence to get that amount of money is "curious"...

Have any of the people who funded him fallen out of windows recently, or was it more likely those who directed them to be (alledgedly) pushed?

MaverickM11 wrote:

Impressive. Even by today's GOP standards.

https://newrepublic.com/post/169751/eve ... ied-so-far

As opposed to Liz I’m an Indian Warren, or I Served in Vietnam Blumenthal.

MaverickM11 wrote:

skyservice_330 wrote:

His Mom died in 9/11 … well, from a 9/11 related illness.. a few years later… in 2016

He is mourning his mother who recently died a third time

I knew a blonde… but, she dyed…

WesternDC6B wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

Impressive. Even by today's GOP standards.

https://newrepublic.com/post/169751/eve ... ied-so-far

As opposed to Liz I’m an Indian Warren, or I Served in Vietnam Blumenthal.

I, too, see no practical or ethical difference between "telling one lie" and "pretty much fabricating my entire life story to the point that lying may be some kind of mental compulsion."

MaverickM11 wrote:

Impressive. Even by today's GOP standards. You may have heard how he is Jew-ish and not Jewish as he claimed, but the list is so much longer than that:

https://newrepublic.com/post/169751/eve ... ied-so-far

What is jew-ish?.

Has anybody confirmed that George ( or Jorge ) Santos is actually his name ?

Another NY congressman has proposed a new law that makes candidates swear to their employment, military and educational backgrounds so that they can be procecuted if they lie. It's called the Stop Another Non-Truthful Office Seeker (SANTOS) Act. Pretty witty!
https://news.yahoo.com/democrat-targets ... 44632.html

WesternDC6B wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

Impressive. Even by today's GOP standards.

https://newrepublic.com/post/169751/eve ... ied-so-far

As opposed to Liz I’m an Indian Warren, or I Served in Vietnam Blumenthal.

There is a difference, though. Sen. Warren got a DNA test, found she has zero Native ancestry and corrected herself. Blumenthal actually did serve in the Marines during Vietnam, not in Vietnam and did correct himself. Oh, and neither claimed to be Jewish, wealthy real estate tycoons, married then gay, living outside the district, etc.

seb146 wrote:

WesternDC6B wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

Impressive. Even by today's GOP standards.

https://newrepublic.com/post/169751/eve ... ied-so-far

As opposed to Liz I’m an Indian Warren, or I Served in Vietnam Blumenthal.

There is a difference, though. Sen. Warren got a DNA test, found she has zero Native ancestry and corrected herself. Blumenthal actually did serve in the Marines during Vietnam, not in Vietnam and did correct himself. Oh, and neither claimed to be Jewish, wealthy real estate tycoons, married then gay, living outside the district, etc.

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

NIKV69 wrote:

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

Seems like it ought to be easy, but Republicans have repeatedly shown that they outright prefer pathological liars, so who knows.

Newark727 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

Seems like it ought to be easy, but Republicans have repeatedly shown that they outright prefer pathological liars, so who knows.

Is there a Republican leader today—popular with the MAGA majority base—that *isn't* a malignant pathological liar? It’s what they want.

MaverickM11 wrote:

Newark727 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

Seems like it ought to be easy, but Republicans have repeatedly shown that they outright prefer pathological liars, so who knows.

Is there a Republican leader today—popular with the MAGA majority base—that *isn't* a malignant pathological liar? It’s what they want.

It’s like Larry the Cable Guy in public office. Stuck in the fantasy of performative politics. Which is what they so very much have disliked about Democrats for years.

It won't be long before he claim that he is married to Donald Trump.

I feel like this guys campaign could be, might be, a stealth “Nathan For You” episode. Happy New Year.

NIKV69 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

WesternDC6B wrote:

As opposed to Liz I’m an Indian Warren, or I Served in Vietnam Blumenthal.

There is a difference, though. Sen. Warren got a DNA test, found she has zero Native ancestry and corrected herself. Blumenthal actually did serve in the Marines during Vietnam, not in Vietnam and did correct himself. Oh, and neither claimed to be Jewish, wealthy real estate tycoons, married then gay, living outside the district, etc.

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

I agree, it’s similar. Both got their seats in Congress based on false biographical details that were nakedly calculated to steal other people’s honor.

Just because someone (Warren) apologizes years later, that makes it okay? I guess if the voters are willing to stoop that low and re-elect them, then maybe it is okay.

LCDFlight wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

There is a difference, though. Sen. Warren got a DNA test, found she has zero Native ancestry and corrected herself. Blumenthal actually did serve in the Marines during Vietnam, not in Vietnam and did correct himself. Oh, and neither claimed to be Jewish, wealthy real estate tycoons, married then gay, living outside the district, etc.

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

I agree, it’s similar. Both got their seats in Congress based on false biographical details that were nakedly calculated to steal other people’s honor.

Just because someone (Warren) apologizes years later, that makes it okay? I guess if the voters are willing to stoop that low and re-elect them, then maybe it is okay.

Honestly, how much of an impact did Warren’s claims have in her electoral victory? Probably zero because MA doesn’t have much of a Native population and they aren’t her support base anyways.

With Santos, he was so brazen with his claims just to gain Jewish voters in a heavily Jewish district. They wouldn’t have felt comfortable voting for him otherwise. His lack of contrition over the whole ordeal just makes it much worse. And he’s still trying to grift people.

https://nypost.com/2022/12/30/rep-elect ... earing-in/

LCDFlight wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

There is a difference, though. Sen. Warren got a DNA test, found she has zero Native ancestry and corrected herself. Blumenthal actually did serve in the Marines during Vietnam, not in Vietnam and did correct himself. Oh, and neither claimed to be Jewish, wealthy real estate tycoons, married then gay, living outside the district, etc.

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

I agree, it’s similar. Both got their seats in Congress based on false biographical details that were nakedly calculated to steal other people’s honor.

Just because someone (Warren) apologizes years later, that makes it okay? I guess if the voters are willing to stoop that low and re-elect them, then maybe it is okay.

Warren actually said she was told she was Native. Many of us have been. My mom's side of the family thought we were. Until they found out great-great grandparents were from Wales. Warren was not pandering to get votes. She was repeating information she had been told. And, "years later" when she found that information was incorrect, she apologized and made the necessary corrections. Unlike Santos. So, no, not even close to the same thing.

WesternDC6B wrote:

As opposed to Liz I’m an Indian Warren, or I Served in Vietnam Blumenthal.

Both of those were really just taken out of context by the media. Blumenthal was a bit sloppy with his speech but he meant he was in the Marines during the Vietnam war, which was misrepresented as “I physically fought in the Vietnam War”. He would talk about experiences that other Marines who had been in Vietnam at that time had but the media reported it as if he had experienced these himself.

The difference with Santos is his entire life story is a complete fabrication. He never went anywhere near those universities he claimed to have a degree from. He never worked a day at companies he claimed to have spent years at. His identity as being gay, Jewish, having health issues was a total fabrication.

It’s as realistic as me saying I’m the CEO of Boeing, the Crown Prince of Monaco, a multi award winning Grammy awards artist and I’ve just won the World Cup for Argentina. A fabrication out of thin air.

The whataboutism from the right is ludicrous.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

The whataboutism from the right is ludicrous.

It really never stops.
This thread ca. 2028:

Look, I know that Senator Skeletor (R-FL) may have decapitated his primary opponent with a broadsword on live TV but no one is talking about DEMOCRAT ANDREW JACKSON'S MANY DUELS

Newark727 wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

The whataboutism from the right is ludicrous.

It really never stops.
This thread ca. 2028:

Look, I know that Senator Skeletor (R-FL) may have decapitated his primary opponent with a broadsword on live TV but no one is talking about DEMOCRAT ANDREW JACKSON'S MANY DUELS

Where was Lauren Bobert ?

https://nypost.com/2022/12/28/national- ... ge-threat/

Russian involvement, good commentary here from a security establishment type about what kind of threat this is.

I knew of the news from Twitter but had to search to find the article. In doing so I found that the Daily Beast had been reporting on his Russian ties all the way back in November.

Hmm.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Both of those were really just taken out of context by the media. Blumenthal was a bit sloppy with his speech but he meant he was in the Marines during the Vietnam war, which was misrepresented as “I physically fought in the Vietnam War”. He would talk about experiences that other Marines who had been in Vietnam at that time had but the media reported it as if he had experienced these himself.

The difference with Santos is his entire life story is a complete fabrication. He never went anywhere near those universities he claimed to have a degree from. He never worked a day at companies he claimed to have spent years at. His identity as being gay, Jewish, having health issues was a total fabrication.

It’s as realistic as me saying I’m the CEO of Boeing, the Crown Prince of Monaco, a multi award winning Grammy awards artist and I’ve just won the World Cup for Argentina. A fabrication out of thin air.

The whataboutism from the right is ludicrous.

"Whataboutism" and "taken out of context" is interesting. What would have been for both Warren and Santos is so say I screwed up and lied. It's ok he will be seated.

NIKV69 wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Both of those were really just taken out of context by the media. Blumenthal was a bit sloppy with his speech but he meant he was in the Marines during the Vietnam war, which was misrepresented as “I physically fought in the Vietnam War”. He would talk about experiences that other Marines who had been in Vietnam at that time had but the media reported it as if he had experienced these himself.

The difference with Santos is his entire life story is a complete fabrication. He never went anywhere near those universities he claimed to have a degree from. He never worked a day at companies he claimed to have spent years at. His identity as being gay, Jewish, having health issues was a total fabrication.

It’s as realistic as me saying I’m the CEO of Boeing, the Crown Prince of Monaco, a multi award winning Grammy awards artist and I’ve just won the World Cup for Argentina. A fabrication out of thin air.

The whataboutism from the right is ludicrous.

"Whataboutism" and "taken out of context" is interesting. What would have been for both Warren and Santos is so say I screwed up and lied. It's ok he will be seated.

If he really has espionage ties, what kind of apology he makes is not the issue. Where did he get his money and how is the question. We really spend too little time reporting and talking about dark money as a political culture.

Another famous George, Costanza, said “it’s really not a lie, if you believe it”

Not so fast: US Supreme Court ruling could protect George Santos from legal punishment

The push to investigate and punish Rep.-elect George Santos (R-N.Y.) for the falsehoods he spread during his 2022 election campaign is on a collision course with a legal precedent set a decade ago when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled lying is constitutionally protected even when it involves officeholders.

https://justthenews.com/accountability/ ... cts-george

NIKV69 wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Both of those were really just taken out of context by the media. Blumenthal was a bit sloppy with his speech but he meant he was in the Marines during the Vietnam war, which was misrepresented as “I physically fought in the Vietnam War”. He would talk about experiences that other Marines who had been in Vietnam at that time had but the media reported it as if he had experienced these himself.

The difference with Santos is his entire life story is a complete fabrication. He never went anywhere near those universities he claimed to have a degree from. He never worked a day at companies he claimed to have spent years at. His identity as being gay, Jewish, having health issues was a total fabrication.

It’s as realistic as me saying I’m the CEO of Boeing, the Crown Prince of Monaco, a multi award winning Grammy awards artist and I’ve just won the World Cup for Argentina. A fabrication out of thin air.

The whataboutism from the right is ludicrous.

"Whataboutism" and "taken out of context" is interesting. What would have been for both Warren and Santos is so say I screwed up and lied. It's ok he will be seated.

Again, and let's not stress this enough

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/16/17983250 ... indian-dna
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/15/65746865 ... n-ancestry

AFTER (read that again and again and once more aloud) she passed the bar in Texas, she claimed Native ancestry. Not to get any points or ahead in any career or any money or win a race. Simply and only for statistical purposes. And she apologized. AND SHE APOLOGIZED!!! So, let's move on from "they are the same" because they clearly are not. "I apologize for identifying as Native when I am not" is not anywhere near the same as "You heard 'Jewish' but I really said 'Jew-ish'" and "but anyone can just magically have $11,000,000 appear in their bank accounts!" and "but I realized I was gay instead of wanting to end up a 60 year old trans woman".

SHE APOLOGIZED because she knew she done wrong!!! SHE APOLOGIZED!!! Get over it. They are not the same. They. Are. Not. The. Same.

NOT THE SAME!!

seb146 wrote:

SHE APOLOGIZED because she knew she done wrong!!! SHE APOLOGIZED!!! Get over it. They are not the same. They. Are. Not. The. Same.

NOT THE SAME!!

As did he, they are the same. He will be seated. Move on.

NIKV69 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

SHE APOLOGIZED because she knew she done wrong!!! SHE APOLOGIZED!!! Get over it. They are not the same. They. Are. Not. The. Same.

NOT THE SAME!!

As did he, they are the same. He will be seated. Move on.

He did not apologize. He said "so what if I embellished! People do that!" That is not an apology. Or are you talking about his "I'm sorry I got caught but I will find a way to get out of this" apology?

Either way, what Warren did and what Santos did are not the same. Not by any stretch at all.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/p ... rge-santos
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/george- ... 23466.html

Santos used stolen checks to buy clothing then fled Brazil. Totally the same as Warren, right?

NIKV69 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

WesternDC6B wrote:

As opposed to Liz I’m an Indian Warren, or I Served in Vietnam Blumenthal.

There is a difference, though. Sen. Warren got a DNA test, found she has zero Native ancestry and corrected herself. Blumenthal actually did serve in the Marines during Vietnam, not in Vietnam and did correct himself. Oh, and neither claimed to be Jewish, wealthy real estate tycoons, married then gay, living outside the district, etc.

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

Regarding Warren she obviously thought she had some native ancestry went to prove it and found out she didn’t. That’s a mistake many people have made, they’re told they’re one thing by parents and relatives, get tested and they’re something completely different.

seb146 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Both of those were really just taken out of context by the media. Blumenthal was a bit sloppy with his speech but he meant he was in the Marines during the Vietnam war, which was misrepresented as “I physically fought in the Vietnam War”. He would talk about experiences that other Marines who had been in Vietnam at that time had but the media reported it as if he had experienced these himself.

The difference with Santos is his entire life story is a complete fabrication. He never went anywhere near those universities he claimed to have a degree from. He never worked a day at companies he claimed to have spent years at. His identity as being gay, Jewish, having health issues was a total fabrication.

It’s as realistic as me saying I’m the CEO of Boeing, the Crown Prince of Monaco, a multi award winning Grammy awards artist and I’ve just won the World Cup for Argentina. A fabrication out of thin air.

The whataboutism from the right is ludicrous.

"Whataboutism" and "taken out of context" is interesting. What would have been for both Warren and Santos is so say I screwed up and lied. It's ok he will be seated.

Again, and let's not stress this enough

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/16/17983250 ... indian-dna
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/15/65746865 ... n-ancestry

AFTER (read that again and again and once more aloud) she passed the bar in Texas, she claimed Native ancestry. Not to get any points or ahead in any career or any money or win a race. Simply and only for statistical purposes. And she apologized. AND SHE APOLOGIZED!!! So, let's move on from "they are the same" because they clearly are not. "I apologize for identifying as Native when I am not" is not anywhere near the same as "You heard 'Jewish' but I really said 'Jew-ish'" and "but anyone can just magically have $11,000,000 appear in their bank accounts!" and "but I realized I was gay instead of wanting to end up a 60 year old trans woman".

SHE APOLOGIZED because she knew she done wrong!!! SHE APOLOGIZED!!! Get over it. They are not the same. They. Are. Not. The. Same.

NOT THE SAME!!

God man you really do put the blinders on when it comes to Democrats and their lies. I will admit this guy Santos takes it to a whole new level in his embellishment. Lets face it if lying was something that got you thrown out of politics we would have zero politicians. The laws and of course congress writes laws that suit them It will be near impossible to remove him at this point. So I am sure next election if the voters have a problem with his lies they will vote him out.

NIKV69 wrote:

As did he, they are the same. He will be seated. Move on.

This thread, ca. 2029:
Sen. The Joker (R-FL) may have just blown up the Federal Reserve with a truck bomb full of laughing gas and a giant oversize novelty kazoo, but I saw a Democrat with illegal fireworks on the fourth of July once. They are the same. Move on.

I had a passing thought that this guy is a bigger idiot than people take him for.

According to him, he went from earning $55 k - was this the Ponzi scheme company - with a wobbly credit history, to being able to lend his election fund $ 700 k in two years. IIRC this fund had a larger than expected number of expenses of $ 199.99, 1 cent below the figure requiring receipts. This turnaround was fuelled by a job that paid him, apparently $ 750 k salary and $ 1 m in dividends, a company that nobody can trace. How long before he hears the most friendly words in the country - 'I'm from the IRS and I'd like to discuss your tax returns' ?

sierrakilo44 wrote:

The difference with Santos is his entire life story is a complete fabrication. He never went anywhere near those universities he claimed to have a degree from. He never worked a day at companies he claimed to have spent years at. His identity as being gay, Jewish, having health issues was a total fabrication.

This is what blows my mind. Did nobody on the Republican side do any sort of check on their candidate? Did nobody on the Democratic side (perhaps the Zimmerman campaign) do any sort of opposition research? Any sort of competent HR type background check should have uncovered the nonexistent degrees at a minimum--I know my last couple employers certainly would have.

stratosphere wrote:

seb146 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

"Whataboutism" and "taken out of context" is interesting. What would have been for both Warren and Santos is so say I screwed up and lied. It's ok he will be seated.

Again, and let's not stress this enough

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/16/17983250 ... indian-dna
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/15/65746865 ... n-ancestry

AFTER (read that again and again and once more aloud) she passed the bar in Texas, she claimed Native ancestry. Not to get any points or ahead in any career or any money or win a race. Simply and only for statistical purposes. And she apologized. AND SHE APOLOGIZED!!! So, let's move on from "they are the same" because they clearly are not. "I apologize for identifying as Native when I am not" is not anywhere near the same as "You heard 'Jewish' but I really said 'Jew-ish'" and "but anyone can just magically have $11,000,000 appear in their bank accounts!" and "but I realized I was gay instead of wanting to end up a 60 year old trans woman".

SHE APOLOGIZED because she knew she done wrong!!! SHE APOLOGIZED!!! Get over it. They are not the same. They. Are. Not. The. Same.

NOT THE SAME!!

God man you really do put the blinders on when it comes to Democrats and their lies. I will admit this guy Santos takes it to a whole new level in his embellishment. Lets face it if lying was something that got you thrown out of politics we would have zero politicians. The laws and of course congress writes laws that suit them It will be near impossible to remove him at this point. So I am sure next election if the voters have a problem with his lies they will vote him out.

Blinders?

This guy's an incel version of the Tinder Swindler just off there lying about an entire fictional career that happened to a different person, with the explicit goal to gain political office, along with Russian money.

I would love to hear a Democrat equiv... wait, scratch that, I don't want to hear anything about this because it has never. happened. before.

I can at least be bolstered by the fact the man is obviously a fraud, and will probably end up behind bars, or with a bag over his head in Guantanamo as part of a counterintel operation to clean up some Russian assets. At the best, he's a liar, a hack, and an actual conman. At the worst, he's a Russian asset, or an attempt at getting an "Illegal" into a congressional seat.

(Of course this being a.net, my post linking about the Russian influence and likely intelligence op, from the NY Post even, was deleted)

Newark727 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

As did he, they are the same. He will be seated. Move on.

This thread, ca. 2029:
Sen. The Joker (R-FL) may have just blown up the Federal Reserve with a truck bomb full of laughing gas and a giant oversize novelty kazoo, but I saw a Democrat with illegal fireworks on the fourth of July once. They are the same. Move on.

If it came out right now that his favorite past-time was finding lonely dogs in the park, befriending them for an afternoon, then strangling them to death, Kevin McCarthy would still warmly greet him and shake his hand as he takes his seat this month.

He's a means to an end to help prop up Kevin's already-dead speakership. They'll probably recycle him back into parts by 2024... or he'll be like the Defense Sec in 2025 or something totally wild.

This has pretty much changed the game though. This weirdo clown has proven that, depending on the state party, you can glide all the way through two primaries and two general elections and swing a seat, without the opposition even realizing the deep depravities of your complete and total fraud.

So now the standard to beat is fictional candidates? Not good enough to win, so just make up a whole different you? This one is infuriating.

TangoandCash wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

The difference with Santos is his entire life story is a complete fabrication. He never went anywhere near those universities he claimed to have a degree from. He never worked a day at companies he claimed to have spent years at. His identity as being gay, Jewish, having health issues was a total fabrication.

This is what blows my mind. Did nobody on the Republican side do any sort of check on their candidate? Did nobody on the Democratic side (perhaps the Zimmerman campaign) do any sort of opposition research? Any sort of competent HR type background check should have uncovered the nonexistent degrees at a minimum--I know my last couple employers certainly would have.

I know a few people who work for the NY Dems. They didn’t work for the Zimmerman campaign, though. They, too, were dismayed at the lack of opposition research his campaign did on Santos, as well as the campaign itself. And living in the district, I am not surprised Santos won. Zimmerman’s campaign was the worst I have ever seen. Zero outreach. No flyers, nobody knocking on doors, no signs, he didn’t even make any campaign stops. Heck, the only ad I saw was this Facebook ad touting support from some union. Huh? This is a white collar area and nobody cares about unions or their endorsements here. Shows how out of touch he was with the district.

Santos was everywhere. Lots of signs, knocked on doors, made visits, and actually campaigned on issues that concerned NY3 constituents. Heck, even I met him when he popped in this restaurant I was eating at. He actually came across as a charming and friendly guy. And I figured he was gay based on my interaction with him. Probably the only thing he didn’t lie about!

Zimmerman claims they did catch some things and tried to get the media’s attention on them, but it’s not true. He keeps bringing up this DCCC report attacking Santos, but I read that report and it only ties him to Trumpism and actually takes his wealth and resume claims at face value. Supposedly, Zimmerman also spent $22K on opposition research. $22K and nothing to show for it? Just shows you what a terrible campaign he ran and how bad a candidate he was.

As for the GOP, they’re now claiming they knew all this from the beginning and didn’t campaign hard for Santos because of that and because he was considered a long shot. Might be true, but I doubt their claims. Either way, I don’t think they would have cared since they truly believed he didn’t have much of a shot based on his 2020 performance (Suozzi’s campaign didn’t do any opposition research either, but he said they didn’t take Santos seriously).

At the end of the day, the GOP, Dems and media all share blame for dropping the ball on research or holding back if they had information. It’s a joke. Biggest losers are NY3 constituents, especially those who voted for him, because they voted him in on a lie.

Brazil has reopened the criminal investigation into George Santos for fraud:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/02/nyre ... razil.html

But an older criminal case may be more pressing: Brazilian law enforcement authorities intend to revive fraud charges against Mr. Santos, and will seek his formal response, prosecutors told The New York Times on Monday.

The matter, which stemmed from an incident in 2008 regarding a stolen checkbook, had been suspended for the better part of a decade because the police were unable to locate him.

A spokeswoman for the Rio de Janeiro prosecutor’s office said that with Mr. Santos’s whereabouts identified, a formal request will be made to the U.S. Justice Department to notify him of the charges, a necessary step after which the case will proceed with or without him.

ThePointblank wrote:

Brazil has reopened the criminal investigation into George Santos for fraud:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/02/nyre ... razil.html

But an older criminal case may be more pressing: Brazilian law enforcement authorities intend to revive fraud charges against Mr. Santos, and will seek his formal response, prosecutors told The New York Times on Monday.

The matter, which stemmed from an incident in 2008 regarding a stolen checkbook, had been suspended for the better part of a decade because the police were unable to locate him.

A spokeswoman for the Rio de Janeiro prosecutor’s office said that with Mr. Santos’s whereabouts identified, a formal request will be made to the U.S. Justice Department to notify him of the charges, a necessary step after which the case will proceed with or without him.

The most insulting thing about this forlorn physical-wreck of gay person of color is his audacity to flaunt it publicly with no concern of consequence....and he made it that far.

WTF does that say about the people who voted for him and the dimwitted Dems who watched this slow motion trainwreck run away with their seat?

As a gay man, he's an embarrassment to those who stand proud on that hard fought into global acceptance.
As a person of color, he wears the whitino flag wherever he can (whitino - Latinos who suppress their ethnicity & heritage in exchance for everything 'white' aka Clarence Thomas).
and a corpulent bold faced liar to boot.

..and yet some want more like him. The Anti-Democracy crowd obviously.

BN747

Kiwirob wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

There is a difference, though. Sen. Warren got a DNA test, found she has zero Native ancestry and corrected herself. Blumenthal actually did serve in the Marines during Vietnam, not in Vietnam and did correct himself. Oh, and neither claimed to be Jewish, wealthy real estate tycoons, married then gay, living outside the district, etc.

They both lied to make themselves more important in the media. Got caught and nothing happened. Want Santos out? Get more votes than him in two years.

Regarding Warren she obviously thought she had some native ancestry went to prove it and found out she didn’t.

And apologized SINCERELY AND HONESTLY and pointed out the flaws in her (and ALL Americans) view of ourselves, While Santos lied about everything and said "meh... everyone does it, so...." which is a sincere apology somehow? And Santos committed bank fraud!! Which is okay? And the same as "I was told before but now I know I am not so so I apologize"? Let's not forget Santos LYING on federal forms, which is a FEDERAL OFFENCE but what Warren did is worse somehow? Explain WITH LINKS PLEASE

stratosphere wrote:

seb146 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

"Whataboutism" and "taken out of context" is interesting. What would have been for both Warren and Santos is so say I screwed up and lied. It's ok he will be seated.

Again, and let's not stress this enough

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/16/17983250 ... indian-dna
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/15/65746865 ... n-ancestry

AFTER (read that again and again and once more aloud) she passed the bar in Texas, she claimed Native ancestry. Not to get any points or ahead in any career or any money or win a race. Simply and only for statistical purposes. And she apologized. AND SHE APOLOGIZED!!! So, let's move on from "they are the same" because they clearly are not. "I apologize for identifying as Native when I am not" is not anywhere near the same as "You heard 'Jewish' but I really said 'Jew-ish'" and "but anyone can just magically have $11,000,000 appear in their bank accounts!" and "but I realized I was gay instead of wanting to end up a 60 year old trans woman".

SHE APOLOGIZED because she knew she done wrong!!! SHE APOLOGIZED!!! Get over it. They are not the same. They. Are. Not. The. Same.

NOT THE SAME!!

God man you really do put the blinders on when it comes to Democrats and their lies./quote]

Which Democrat said "I never said I am Jewish but 'Jew-ish'"? Which Democrat said "I never said I was worth $11,000,000 even though my tax returns say $5,000"? The guy who was kicked out of the Democratic party for keeping bribes in his freezer? The Democrat who was sent to jail in Illinois for taking bribes? The ones who were found lying and paid for lying? Let's compare that to the Republicans who lie and take bribes and Republican leadership says "yeah, but both sides to it so who cares? Give him a pass! Both sides do it!" Oh, wait... this is so much better than the Marine veteran who said he served as a Marine during Vietnam or the Senator who said she was told for decades she was Native then took a DNA test and found out she is not Native and apologized and changed course. Democrats are so much worse for apologizing and changing course and admitting what they did. I guess they need to "man up" and be more Republican and just lean into the lie.

Should also be noted that Brazil and the US have an extradition treaty in place, and there's also a mutual legal assistance treaty in place as well.

If Brazil decides to formally charge Santos, and request the US extradite him to Brazilian custody, things are going to get really weird really quickly.

Another thought: did he disclose to US Immigration about the pending fraud charge in Brazil when he emigrated to the US? If not, he may have entered the US illegally, and thus legally, not an American citizen. He would therefore be ineligible for his Congress seat.

johns624 wrote:

As astounding as his lies are, they aren't what concerns me. Where did he get the money to loan his campaign $750,000? Somebody bought and paid for him and I want to know who it is. For a newcomer with no influence to get that amount of money is "curious"...

So if there’s a good explanation for the money, his lying doesn’t matter and he can do the job?

NIKV69 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

SHE APOLOGIZED because she knew she done wrong!!! SHE APOLOGIZED!!! Get over it. They are not the same. They. Are. Not. The. Same.

NOT THE SAME!!

As did he, they are the same. He will be seated. Move on.

Your “move on” shows how rotten the US political system has become. Lying about everything and you can get away with it.

ThePointblank wrote:

Should also be noted that Brazil and the US have an extradition treaty in place, and there's also a mutual legal assistance treaty in place as well.

If Brazil decides to formally charge Santos, and request the US extradite him to Brazilian custody, things are going to get really weird really quickly.

Another thought: did he disclose to US Immigration about the pending fraud charge in Brazil when he emigrated to the US? If not, he may have entered the US illegally, and thus legally, not an American citizen. He would therefore be ineligible for his Congress seat.

Unfortunately, this would basically be a diplomatic incident, unless handled perfectly right. He might be a criminal/murderer/fraud/psycho/fraud/Russian asset/fraud/Manchurian candidate/intelligence asset/fraud, but he can't just be handed over to Brazilian authorities to face like... tax evasion.

This is our problem, we can't deport it. I'm assuming the CIA and NSA are probably looking into his origins a little closer right now. He's not going to get a black bag over the head, he should, but this might be an unsatisfying conclusion.

This guy's an incomparable fraud artist, or an intelligence asset. He looks too stupid to be an asset, but there's untraced money involved, so I'm going to go with asset.

Anyone who's ever described Obama as a Manchurian candidate should just like... light on fire now.